Global warming is killing me..

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 6:39 am

this am, its been since 2003 that ive seen the snow flake near the outside temp!!! Now remember this is Orlando, fla area, so I can only imagine how much worse it is mid/up north!!!

Post by **joerg** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:58 am

thedeal7235 wrote:gotcha!!!! how much were they from mandrops, saw pricing but in euros, or different currency-

Made a special deal through a dealer in austria and got the set for 500 Euros instead of 599. That´s 650 USD by today.

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:01 am

DAMN!!!!!!!!!

OldSchoolFool · Post by **OldSchoolFool** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:46 am

like, x1000!!!

I got to wondering what the average temperature of the planet should be. I mean, afterall, we base so much of what we know on, well, only what we know, like what we see and feel over our lives.

So, while realizing that we are but a spec, a mere vapour that appears for a little while and vanishes, in geologic time, one can immediately conclude that the "average temperature" of the earth might extend beyond our egotistical gnats view of things.

I found a chart that might help put things into a different perspective.

Quoting the author: "Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya -- 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period )."

In other words (simple words for a simple man like me) THINGS ARE COOLER NOW THAN THEY HAVE BEEN FOR 600 MILLION YEARS. Wow, hopefully we don't get any colder, starving millions, uh, billions, of people are looking to Canada and Russia for more wheat.

Note that the author places the tag "average global temp." at about 10° (C) higher than it is today. That's about 18° F for you Americans.

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:07 pm

so when was the "ICE AGE" per this chart, the 300 or the 450-bill years ago-(great lesson mr. history channel

)

Post by **Rold Gold** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:16 pm

Guess I'd better start buying stock in companies like Columbia Sportsware if the earth is heading back to a frozen tundra.

OldSchoolFool · Post by **OldSchoolFool** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:36 pm

The scale of this chart doesn't show what we consider "ice ages"- the ones that have happened recently and are relatively short (compared to the time scale on this chart).

Much higher temperatures, and much higher CO2, is the norm for planet Earf. Things grow, plants and animals multiply- it's a beautiful thing. Ice ages cause mass extinctions like none man can even dream of.

Also get nuke power stocks. It's the only thing we can build fast enough to keep up with the power requirements of running Europe/Canada/N.America from under a very thick glacier.

andy600rr · Post by **andy600rr** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:54 pm

Come on down to Australia if you don't think the world climate is mucked up. We've been in drought conditions for the past few years with no end in sight. More and more farmers are leaving their land because it's no longer economically viable for them to farm stock (due to the price of feed) or crops (due to the price of water per megalitre).

Temp here over the last 4 days or so has been hovering around 40 degrees C. (104F)

Damn hot, but good weather for

Post by **Rold Gold** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:25 pm

It's always beer weather.

OldSchoolFool · Post by **OldSchoolFool** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:22 pm

Lessee... summertime in a country as close to the equator as Texas... 104°, check. Dry, check. What's mucked up about that?

Here is some reading on the subject, not that you need any, but the non-Aussies in the room can understand better if they hear it from your government directly:

"Over much of the country, droughts can extend over several years, relieved only by brief, transitory rains. Indeed, probably the most damaging type of drought is when one or two very dry years follow several years of generally below-average rainfall. The “Federation drought” of the late 1890s through 1902 is an example, as is the more recent 1991-95 drought in Queensland, northern New South Wales and parts of central Australia. Over still longer time-scales, Australia’s rainfall history features several periods of a decade or longer that seem to have been distinctly “drought prone”. For instance, the mid to late 1920s and the 1930s were a period of generally low rainfall over most of the country, continuing through most of the 1940s over the eastern states. A similar dry spell occurred in the 1960s over central and eastern Australia. During these low rainfall periods, not every year is dry; it is just that rainfall in most years is below the long-term average, and there are often runs of years with recurrent drought. Thus in the late 1930s-40s major droughts occurred over eastern Australia in 1937-38, 1940-41, and 1943-45.

The 1990s saw formal Government acknowledgement that drought is part of the natural variability of the Australian climate, with drought relief for farmers and agricultural communities being restricted to times of so-called “exceptional circumstances”. In other words, the agricultural sector was expected to cope with the occasional drought, and relief would be available only for droughts of unusual length or severity."

Linky: http://www.bom.gov.au/lam/climate/level ... rought.htm

If we drink enough beer, we can stop continental drift and make the sun behave in ways that make us comfortable, I suppose. I'll try that out tonight!

I'll even get some of that fine Aussie plonk with a kangaroo on it and wish for some of your heat.

andy600rr · Post by **andy600rr** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:44 pm

OSF, Nothing too messed up about it. Maybe the wrong choice of words on my behalf

Moreso just trying to contrast to all the other guys here who are in the grip of winter.

Drought sucks though. Our water restrictions got so bad last year that we were'nt even allowed to wash our cars. The only water we were allowed to use on cars was to wash windscreens, headlights & tail lights.

We are currently allowed to water our gardens between certain hours only 2 days of the week and hav'nt been allowed to water lawns for more years than I care to remember.

Post by **fuzzysnuggleduck** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:47 pm

I certainly agree that there are very definable cycles and variations in climate history on earth. That's how existence is, in flux. And those antarctic ice layers and what can be deduced from them is pretty cool! I'm fairly certain both sides of this issue have used the data from the ice packs to support their case. It shows that it's all about the methods used to analyze the data and that simply viewing the graph on it's own is often not that telling of what is really being depicted.

I'm open to the concept that we may potentially effect a larger trend in the climate timeline of earth but that is something that's rather difficult to substantiate into a conclusion that will semi-uniformly be agreed upon. I don't need to feel strongly about it either way, I certainly won't argue anyone but maybe poke some fun

I see why people would take either stance on the issue, I guess.

With that in mind, it would be nice if air quality didn't totally go to shit everywhere. That's not directly directly related to the whole CO2:Temperature thing, but similar. If we can reduce toxins released into the air (especially around populated areas) incrementally without financial burden (it's been done), that's probably a good thing.

Edit: I just found this and I like it: http://jeffreyellis.org/blog/?p=44

It's basically just a walk-through of using some logic, it happens to involve this topic too.

andy600rr · Post by **andy600rr** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:50 pm

fuzzysnuggleduck wrote: If we can reduce toxins released into the air (especially around populated areas) incrementally without financial burden (it's been done), that's probably a good thing.

And this coming from a smoker

J/K

OldSchoolFool · Post by **OldSchoolFool** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:03 am

What astounds me is the logical leap people must make, a leap of faith in my opinion, that rising temperatures + CO2 is a bad thing. I take nothing on faith.

So going by what I know:
Greenhouse operators use concentrations of CO2 much higher than the atmosphere to grow food. This grows more food. The very existance of a "greenhouse" shows that warmth and sunlight (plus much CO2) is a needed mixture for growing food. More food is good, unless you think the starving millions should just die.

CO2 and temperature has never created a feedback loop that was bad for life on this planet. Quite the opposite- in warm times living things multiply and are abundant and varied. Ice ages have created feedback loops that nearly wiped the planet clean several times.

So, cold=bad, warm=good (for life). They estimate we are all descendants of 10k or so humans who flourished during the last bout of "global warming" (ice age reversal).

Hello brothers!!!

I say we teach the poor nations to do efficient farming (involving machines), and teach them how to use nuclear, coal and gas properly (like we do in the western world) so that the pollution can be kept to a minimum. If you haven't been to China, you've never seen real air-pollution. Sooner or later the prosperity will catch up to the 3rd world and they will mimic western birth rates (declining).

So the population/pollution problem is solved by the carefull use of energy, and encouraging prosperity. So why is it that our western leaders are calling for dramatic cuts in our use of energy, and dramatic changes to our lifestyle that involve less prosperity?

Post by **fuzzysnuggleduck** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:07 am

andy600rr wrote:
fuzzysnuggleduck wrote: If we can reduce toxins released into the air (especially around populated areas) incrementally without financial burden (it's been done), that's probably a good thing.
And this coming from a smoker

J/K

It's funny because sometime after posting that, I was sure someone was going to comment on it.

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:07 am

I wasnt sure if u were a smoker or not- in my garage( i guess cuz im cheap, and a little poor at the moment) i use empty glass frap bottles, and they fill up similar to urs FSD-

Post by **Francious70** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 11:35 am

thedeal7235 wrote:I wasnt sure if u were a smoker or not- in my garage( i guess cuz im cheap, and a little poor at the moment) i use empty glass frap bottles, and they fill up similar to urs FSD-

I find 40oz. Bud LIght bottles to work pretty good because they last for half a damn year and they extinguish the butts when you drop them in because of the lack of O2.